Comparison of Accelerate PhenoTest BC Kit and MALDI-TOF MS/VITEK 2 System for the rapid identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of gram-negative bacilli causing bloodstream infections

比较 Accelerate PhenoTest BC 试剂盒和 MALDI-TOF MS/VITEK 2 系统在快速鉴定和抗菌药物敏感性检测引起血流感染的革兰氏阴性杆菌方面的性能

阅读:2

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Our laboratory uses matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI) and the VITEK 2 system (DV2) directly from positive blood cultures (BC) for organism identification (ID) and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST). Our objective was to compare direct MALDI-DV2 with a commercial BC ID-AST platform, the Accelerate Pheno system (AXDX), in the ID-AST of clinical and seeded BC positive for gram-negative bacilli (GNB). METHODS: BC positive for GNB were collected over a 3-mo period and tested using AXDX and direct MALDI-DV2 and compared with conventional methods. A subset of sterile BC were seeded with multi-drug-resistant GNB. RESULTS: Twenty-nine clinical samples and 35 seeded samples were analyzed. Direct MALDI had a higher ID failure rate (31.0%) than AXDX (3.4%; p < 0.001). Time to ID-AST was 1.5-6.9 h, 5.8-16.5 h, and 21.6-33.0 h for AXDX, direct MALDI-DV2, and conventional methods, respectively (p < 0.001). For clinical samples, AXDX and DV2 had essential agreement (EA) or categorical agreement (CA) of more than 96%. For seeded samples, AXDX had EA, CA, VME, ME, and minor error (mE) of 93.2%, 89.0%, 2.2%, 0%, and 9.2%, respectively. AXDX had a large number of non-reports (6.1%) stemming from meropenem testing. DV2 had EA, CA, VME, ME, and mE of 97.5%, 94.7%, 1.3%, 0%, and 4.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Direct MALDI-DV2 and AXDX both had high agreement for clinical samples, but direct MALDI-DV2 had higher agreement when challenged with MDR GNB.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。